Also,
The Spurs deserve to play the worst team, OKC Deserves to play the 2nd worst team, and the Clippers deserve to play the 3rd worst team. It isn't fair that the West will have such tough Semi-final match ups. You will have two of the top 3 teams in the league (OKC and the Clippers) playing in a 2nd round series.

__________________
I am never coming back to SpursReport because Will The Thrill is a horses ass.

Then what's the point of even having conferences? There is no fundamental reason why the East is so week this year, so it will balance itself out. Unless some team that has a legitimate chance at winning a championship is left out of the playoffs, there is nothing broken with the current system. If the Spurs can't beat an opponent in a seven game series, then they don't deserve to be in the finals. Just leave it alone Pyat Pree.

Disagree with b1gdon, agree with the others. You can have conferences for who plays who 4 times vs. 2 times during the year, but absolutely the playoffs need tweaking. Not only having Phoenix miss while ATL gets in, but it's a foregone conclusion that it's Miami and Indiana despite Indy's fall. It it's top 16, Miami and IND fall to a race for 4 or 5. Also cuts down on teams resting players the last couple of games with seeding "locked up" when you have more teams in the mix. I like that Silver is thinking outside the box to fix some of the NBA's problems.

and what about the number of games against conference/ division/ etc during regular... only playing the exact number of games against any Team of the league can lead to fair sedding ....and to achieve that, milleage on traveling can be obstacle...

__________________
“ I’m honored to be on this team right now because he’s going to be great for years to come, and I’m going to hold on as long as I can.” -Tim Duncan on Kawhi Leonard.

So this would mean only Phoenix would be the only team that should be in the playoffs and would slide in to fifth in the east, drop everyone down a slot. Or be in the 8th slot and be happy they're allowed to participate in the post season, but it punishes the eastern team with a most likely longer travel schedule. So on one hand it's fair, but on the other it's not.

There is no fundamental reason why the East is so week this year, so it will balance itself out.

There is a reason actually. Maybe this year is worse than others but it has been bad for over a decade. The reason is that strong west teams that barely miss the playoffs get no worse than a 15th pick. While worse teams out east get no better than 16th.

Take this year for example. Phoenix could be the 11th best team in the league getting a 15th pick while Toronto being the 12th best team gets to pick 21st. And Atlanta being the 18th best team gets to pick 16th.

Bad east teams that make the playoffs essentially get punished with lower draft picks while west teams who barely miss the playoffs get higher draft picks. Everyone says this is cyclical but it's gotten so lopsided the trend is only going to continue if things stay the same.

There is a reason actually. Maybe this year is worse than others but it has been bad for over a decade. The reason is that strong west teams that barely miss the playoffs get no worse than a 15th pick. While worse teams out east get no better than 16th.

Take this year for example. Phoenix could be the 11th best team in the league getting a 15th pick while Toronto being the 12th best team gets to pick 21st. And Atlanta being the 18th best team gets to pick 16th.

Bad east teams that make the playoffs essentially get punished with lower draft picks while west teams who barely miss the playoffs get higher draft picks. Everyone says this is cyclical but it's gotten so lopsided the trend is only going to continue if things stay the same.

Playing each team 2 times with no back to backs?...but the League, it's media affiliates and medical specialists would never go for the lost revenue.

Not sure if this is meant to be a joke or not. I said play everyone else 3 times. You'd probably have to add a week or two to the schedule (just shorten the preseason) to prevent players from getting exhausted. Otherwise you'd be squeezing in a lot more back to backs (and back to back to backs).

Not sure if this is meant to be a joke or not. I said play everyone else 3 times. You'd probably have to add a week or two to the schedule (just shorten the preseason) to prevent players from getting exhausted. Otherwise you'd be squeezing in a lot more back to backs (and back to back to backs).

Not meant as a joke. Just another option as a 58 game regular season with no back to backs, probably fewer injuries and fewer key players sitting out to rest. Maybe even long careers for players that have to retire early from nagging injuries. Where would teams like Chicago, New Orleans and Atlanta be in the standings right now if it were not for injuries? Injuries are still going to occur, I just think that there would be fewer.

29 regular season games are played in college.
46 regular season games are played in the Euroleague with each of the 24 teams playing twice. The Euroleague (FIBA) has 245 million viewers in 199 countries according to Wikipedia.

Not meant as a joke. Just another option as a 58 game regular season with no back to backs, probably fewer injuries and fewer key players sitting out to rest. Maybe even long careers for players that have to retire early from nagging injuries. Where would teams like Chicago, New Orleans and Atlanta be in the standings right now if it were not for injuries? Injuries are still going to occur, I just think that there would be fewer.

29 regular season games are played in college.
46 regular season games are played in the Euroleague with each of the 24 teams playing twice. The Euroleague (FIBA) has 245 million viewers in 199 countries according to Wikipedia.

Sorry but 58 games is not enough for a team to gel. It reminds me too much of the '98 lockout and how awful most teams looked even at the end of the regular season. Sure it would help consistent teams (Spurs) but this league has a lot of player movement. Also, they would have to move the trade deadline up a month or two so that any new player could be worked into a system.

Sorry but 58 games is not enough for a team to gel. It reminds me too much of the '98 lockout and how awful most teams looked even at the end of the regular season. Sure it would help consistent teams (Spurs) but this league has a lot of player movement. Also, they would have to move the trade deadline up a month or two so that any new player could be worked into a system.

I'm not necessarily for a 58-game season, I'm just presenting another option. But I find what you are saying to be benefited by a 58-game season. Franchises that are trading players around like a stack of trading cards would soon be discouraged to do so and the "player movement" would stabilize. As to the player deadline, I don't understand how changing it is a big issue.

Thesee are some good ideas... but I dont like any of them unless you get rid of the conferences altogether. What is the poinr in keeping them?

RIVALRIES!!!!!!!!!!!!

Get rid of the conferences and all of a sudden Spurs/Mavs loses most of it's meaning. Sure you'll still have the proximity, but just look at the Rockets. They are the closest team to SA, they were a playoff contender in the Yao era, but all that animosity we built up in the Admiral/Dream era is almost all gone because we haven't faced them in the playoffs since 1996. Compare that to Spurs/Mavs, Suns or Lakers and it is not even close. As long as Houston is nearby and in our state, there will always be a sibling rivalry, but true rivals are born through frequent regular season games and in the playoffs. Abolish the conferences and you reduce the chance of seeing any opponent by half. All for what, so some mediocre team like Phx or Min can lose in the first round.

Get rid of the conferences and all of a sudden Spurs/Mavs loses most of it's meaning. Sure you'll still have the proximity, but just look at the Rockets. They are the closest team to SA, they were a playoff contender in the Yao era, but all that animosity we built up in the Admiral/Dream era is almost all gone because we haven't faced them in the playoffs since 1996. Compare that to Spurs/Mavs, Suns or Lakers and it is not even close. As long as Houston is nearby and in our state, there will always be a sibling rivalry, but true rivals are born through frequent regular season games and in the playoffs. Abolish the conferences and you reduce the chance of seeing any opponent by half. All for what, so some mediocre team like Phx or Min can lose in the first round.

I would say the only reason to keep conferences would be for the all star game.

You mention rivalries as a reason to keep conferences because rivalries are built in the playoffs. As you mentioned, we had a rivalry with the Rockets but that has died not because we haven't seen them in the playoffs but because they haven't prevented us from advancing in the playoffs. If we meet the Mavs (or Suns) in round one this year, will they really be a rival? No, they'll just be first round fodder that used to be a contender. Our current rivals are the Thunder, Heat and maybe Memphis. Abolishing conferences wouldn't change that. Ultimately the best teams will advance farther in the playoffs and that's where you get your rivalries.

Getting rid of conferences would open us up to a slew of new potential rivals. Imagine Lakers-Celtics or Bulls-Jazz (from the late 90's) meeting up in an early round. What if we get a Spurs-Heat Semi-finals? There will always be geographic rivals, but if you allow everyone to play everyone else, it will end up being more fun for the fans. How many here wished we could have had a Jordan-Robinson playoff battle? Or as I mentioned earlier, a rematch with the Heat? In the end, having the 16 BEST teams in the playoffs is better for the league than worrying about silly conference titles.

Just had this thought: What if you played your division rivals 4 times (16 games), everyone else 2 times (50 games) and 2 rotating teams from opposing divisions a third time (10 games). That would total 76 games and allow for more parity among the conferences.

Oh dear, someone missed the point. Sorry b1gdon, but you're actually helping make my argument for me. Why is this FIRST round so exciting? Probably because you have such evenly matched teams playing each other (5 teams in the West separated by less than 5 games). Why is this bad? Well, what's happening out East? Miami has an easy sweep, and will probably cakewalk past a 44 win Nets team and then a 44 win Washington team in the conference finals. That's right, Miami won't have to play anyone within 6 wins of who the Spurs have to play IN THE FIRST ROUND!! What's the point of a SEEDED tournament? To reward teams for winning in the regular season with an "easier" path to the final and put the 2 "best" teams on opposite sides of the bracket so you have the most exciting semi-final and final match-ups possible. What's fair about a team that won 10 MORE GAMES than Atlanta having to go home? What's awesome about having either Portland/Houston or Gstate/Clips going home in round 1 while teams like Indiana/ATL or Wash/Chicago keep hanging around for more unwatchable basketball? Sorry, but as "exciting" as the West has been, the East has been horrible (and don't try to make the argument that a game 7 makes IND/ATL "exciting" because those games are anything but that.)

(and by the way, why is anyone "eating crow"? because you said the 1st round would be exciting...seems like you were 4/8 on your predictions which didn't even have the right matchups....sorry, no crow for me)

What kills me is that MIA doesn’t have any real challengers in the east so they get an easy ride to the finals. IND, NYK or CHI are all teams the league promotes as other challengers to the Heat but none of them really are. Whatever team from the west that makes it has to battle every round to get there. The team from the west is exhausted before they even being. I would put money on it that if The Heat played in the west they would not have made to the finals for the last 3 years. That is not even counting the fact they get to beat up on a bunch of easy teams during the regular season. Playoffs need to be fixed.

With Minnesotta 1 game behind.
Up to Golden State West team would have HCA. Only two teams in the East would have HCA.
There is some twaeking needed.

We would have played Charlotte in fisrt round, then best of Warriors/Dallas, tnen Miami/Indy to finish with OKC/Clips.
Sounds to me pretty the same. Conf Semis,Finals and NBA Finals are for the best 8, and rarely a bad team makes it. Whats the point of changing?